Curse

Bryant Again · Jun 18, 2009, 11:49 PM // 23:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Not this again.

Based on a lot of non-scientific evidence that is all.

I.e. based on experience and experiences vary. Thank you.

DreamWind · Jun 19, 2009, 12:36 AM // 00:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

That is YOU. Everybody has a choice whether to play with heroes or play with someone else.

You still aren't seeing why what you are saying does not get us anywhere. You are basically using the choice argument...that is you are assuming that every possible choice is a good thing which in and of itself is false. You are basically saying "since we have the choice to use heroes they are good". You have to tell me WHY they are good...in reality I see 1 way they are good and about 20 why they are bad.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

If the person didn't want to play with you and would rather play with heroes what gives you the right to forcibly remove his choice of playing with heroes over yours? I just seems so childish that you would even consider forcing people to play with you when they dont want to. I still recommend that you learn to befriend others so that they would feel better about partying with you, rather than asking ANet to FORCE them.

Nobody has been forced, is being forced, or ever will be forced. This is another thing I see pop up that makes no sense. How about the people who when they play Guild Wars are forced to play a solo game with heroes in it? Now do you get why what you say still gets us nowhere? You have to tell me why heroes are good for the game as a whole. All I see in this thread are personal experiences similar to what I see in the balance threads with people who don't want anything nerfed but refuse to look at the game as a whole because the inbalance is fun for them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pinguinius

It wasn't an argument for or against heroes, learn to read. I was just pointing out that you are whining because things aren't the way you would personally like them. Which, by the way, you totally are.

I am simply voicing opposition. That is the point of this topic after all and that is also the point of forums. Get back to us when you want to add anything useful.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

I.e. based on experience and experiences vary. Thank you.

We've been over this before. Would you like to ask Anet to give us hard statistics on who plays solo and who doesn't? I'd be glad to ask but I know I wouldn't get an answer. That is probably the only way you will be satisfied on this issue. It reminds me of the people who thought there were more PvP players than PvE players back in the old days before Anet gave us the actual stats. To me it is foolish to think this game is still a multiplayer game.

Daesu · Jun 19, 2009, 01:58 AM // 01:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

You still aren't seeing why what you are saying does not get us anywhere. You are basically using the choice argument...that is you are assuming that every possible choice is a good thing which in and of itself is false. You are basically saying "since we have the choice to use heroes they are good". You have to tell me WHY they are good...in reality I see 1 way they are good and about 20 why they are bad.

As long as there is a choice in playing style it is good for the game as a whole because everyone is unique and different, it lends to the game's diversity. Yet in a sense, everyone has the same potential to grow in the game since we are all playing the same game.

snaek · Jun 19, 2009, 02:17 AM // 02:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by stokely

Who cares if someone in your group made you fail, at least you weren't spending all of your GW time with yourself.

i want to stress this point, because this is an important issue imo. proph days, many people played just to have fun. nowadays, people take gw as srs bsns with all the titles and items to grind out. this makes people rage a lot more on pugs creating hostility between people.

Quote:

Originally Posted by daesu

There is really not much socializing going on in most PUGs.

opposed to the socializing going on in h/h? i mean, the quotes that mhenlo and devona say are pretty interesting, but i never considered replying to them.

Quote:

That is YOU. Everybody has a choice whether to play with heroes or play with someone else. If the person didn't want to play with you and would rather play with heroes what gives you the right to forcibly remove his choice of playing with heroes over yours? I just seems so childish that you would even consider forcing people to play with you when they dont want to.

to be honest, this thread isn't going anywhere, because the puggers are trying to argue pugging vs h/h, while the hero supporters are trying to argue pugging vs guild/friend groups. i've already stated earlier that heroes did not have a very big effect on guild groups, but it had a heavy impact on pug groups.

a pugger simply does not have a choice to pug, simply because there isnt many people pugging anymore. your a guild grouper, so your still happy because you have your option still available to you.... but puggers have lost their option. this is not debatable, you simply can not find a pug group for many things in gw as easy as you used to.

vandevere · Jun 19, 2009, 02:26 AM // 02:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by snaek

i want to stress this point, because this is an important issue imo. proph days, many people played just to have fun. nowadays, people take gw as srs bsns with all the titles and items to grind out. this makes people rage a lot more on pugs creating hostility between people.

opposed to the socializing going on in h/h? i mean, the quotes that mhenlo and devona say are pretty interesting, but i never considered replying to them.

to be honest, this thread isn't going anywhere, because the puggers are trying to argue pugging vs h/h, while the hero supporters are trying to argue pugging vs guild/friend groups. i've already stated earlier that heroes did not have a very big effect on guild groups, but it had a heavy impact on pug groups.

a pugger simply does not have a choice to pug, simply because there isnt many people pugging anymore. your a guild grouper, so your still happy because you have your option still available to you.... but puggers have lost their option. this is not debatable, you simply can not find a pug group for many things in gw as easy as you used to.

Actually...

I haven't had much trouble getting into groups. I also play with Guildies, and I H/H when I feel like it.

I haven't found pugs to be the totally negative experience others have made it out to be. But I do need to be in the mood for it. Same as when I group with my Guildies.

But, there are times when I don't feel... sociable...times when I just want to grab some Heroes and Henchies, and take my frustrations out on poor hapless monsters.

In my mind, all three options-pugging for the halibut, doing HM with Guildies, or just plain foolin' around with heroes-are all equally valid. It all depends on how I feel at the time. On what I want to do...

DreamWind · Jun 19, 2009, 02:36 AM // 02:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

As long as there is a choice in playing style it is good for the game as a whole because everyone is unique and different, it lends to the game's diversity. Yet in a sense, everyone has the same potential to grow in the game since we are all playing the same game.

That is not true in the slightest. For example, say there is a skill that does 10 billion damage. Many people would enjoy using it because it fits their playstyle. That doesn't make it good for the game. How are heroes good? For every one thing you say is good I can probably list at least two that are bad.

Bryant Again · Jun 19, 2009, 04:29 AM // 04:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

We've been over this before. Would you like to ask Anet to give us hard statistics on who plays solo and who doesn't? I'd be glad to ask but I know I wouldn't get an answer. That is probably the only way you will be satisfied on this issue. It reminds me of the people who thought there were more PvP players than PvE players back in the old days before Anet gave us the actual stats. To me it is foolish to think this game is still a multiplayer game.

If we're not getting any actual statistics, I really don't see what there is to argue about.

As I said earlier, we only know very little: NF was released, Heroes were released, less players have been playing with others since then, or even earlier. We do not know why. Until we do get some hard cold facts, we have nothing to go on. Our guesses are as good as anyones.

No one here is saying that Guild Wars is the same as it used to at release (but those that are should probably check outposts more). But the causes of that can't be pointed at.

Daesu · Jun 19, 2009, 04:43 AM // 04:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by snaek

a pugger simply does not have a choice to pug, simply because there isnt many people pugging anymore. your a guild grouper, so your still happy because you have your option still available to you.... but puggers have lost their option. this is not debatable, you simply can not find a pug group for many things in gw as easy as you used to.

If even I can start as a pugger myself and still enjoy the game today as a pugger or guild/alliance team member or heroes user, anybody can. I dont consider myself as any great socialite either.

Despite what you said puggers can still pug in this game and even if they can't find random stranger to party them, they can still make friends or join guilds to play with other humans. Instead of forcibly pushing yourself (i.e. being pathetic) into someone's team who prefer to solo anyway, why dont you look to join someone who actually prefer the company of other human players instead? It is not a zero sum game. Try to spend some efforts adapting to the times.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

How are heroes good? For every one thing you say is good I can probably list at least two that are bad.

Heroes are simply good just because they are an additional option for people to play this game. Limiting options like you suggest, by forcing everyone to play a certain way, decreases play style variety and is not good for the game.

DreamWind · Jun 19, 2009, 06:00 AM // 06:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

If we're not getting any actual statistics, I really don't see what there is to argue about.

Maybe we need a petition to get those stats then. I am looking at this as objectively as possible without stats. Either way, I bet Anet doesn't want us to see the stats because it would prove what I am saying, and they don't want people to know that what I'm saying is true.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

Heroes are simply good just because they are an additional option for people to play this game. Limiting options like you suggest, by forcing everyone to play a certain way, decreases play style variety and is not good for the game.

Did you even read my last post?

Not all options are necessarily good.

Bryant Again · Jun 19, 2009, 06:28 AM // 06:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Maybe we need a petition to get those stats then. I am looking at this as objectively as possible without stats. Either way, I bet Anet doesn't want us to see the stats because it would prove what I am saying, and they don't want people to know that what I'm saying is true.

It's pretty near impossible to be "objective" about something when there's no information about how it happened. NF was released, and either people started to notice that less people were in outposts or people just started to dwindle in outposts. Everything after that is personal bias and theory.

@below: Sorry if it comes off as "if" since any idiot can see that GW is no longer as populated. No, I'm strictly asking "how".

DreamWind · Jun 19, 2009, 06:33 AM // 06:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

It's pretty near impossible to be "objective" about something when there's no information about how it happened.

To me you are not asking HOW it happened....you are asking IF it happened. IF it happened we know HOW it happened.

Daesu · Jun 19, 2009, 06:36 AM // 06:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Did you even read my last post?

Not all options are necessarily good.

This option is good.

Gli · Jun 19, 2009, 06:52 AM // 06:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

You have to tell me WHY they are good...in reality I see 1 way they are good and about 20 why they are bad.

Why do we need more than one reason why the presence of heroes is a good thing? As long as it outweighs the sum of all reasons why they are bad, 1 reason is fine.

Here's the reason why I think they're good.

Heroes are good because they make the game more enjoyable for people who prefer to play without strangers in their party, without taking away anything from people who want to play with strangers in their party, other than the companionship of people who don't want to play with them in the first place.

Now, I'd like to see your 20 reasons why they are bad.

Quote:

Originally Posted by snaek

i want to stress this point, because this is an important issue imo. proph days, many people played just to have fun. nowadays, people take gw as srs bsns with all the titles and items to grind out. this makes people rage a lot more on pugs creating hostility between people.

By 'nowadays', you mean like since 3 months after Prophecy's release, right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by snaek

to be honest, this thread isn't going anywhere, because the puggers are trying to argue pugging vs h/h, while the hero supporters are trying to argue pugging vs guild/friend groups. i've already stated earlier that heroes did not have a very big effect on guild groups, but it had a heavy impact on pug groups.

a pugger simply does not have a choice to pug, simply because there isnt many people pugging anymore.

That's so sad.

angelsarc · Jun 19, 2009, 06:56 AM // 06:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by snaek

i want to stress this point, because this is an important issue imo. proph days, many people played just to have fun. nowadays, people take gw as srs bsns with all the titles and items to grind out. this makes people rage a lot more on pugs creating hostility between people.

I don't know about you, but I don't find failing fun. If I want to laugh about failing at Guild Wars, I go play with my friends and not random people. Yes, Prophecies was very different, because everyone was equally bad (for the most part), but there were still areas like THK where you'd see exceptionally terrible players who were unable to find groups. Should others be forced to carry these players through the game? No. It was mentioned elsewhere, though I don't remember where, that the problem is that the game isn't able to tell bad players that they are bad at the game. It's true.

@DreamWind
It's amazing how you guys can argue that PUGs are necessary for the survival of Guild Wars and that heroes have killed the game. Even from an objective standpoint that's ludicrous. How many people do you think would stop playing if they became unable to use heroes to do things in hard mode? It's certainly at least as many as those complaining that no one wants to play with them, and more than the number that supposedly quit because of heroes. There are any number of reasons that people stop playing, and the introduction of heroes is definitely not high on that list.

People will play with others if they want to do so. Making them unable to do anything without playing with others would be a horrible decision. Guild Wars has, from the very start, been about convenience and being able to solo clear areas with henchmen was a selling point. Unlike most other games, you don't need to sit around and wait for a group to go do something. Henchmen just aren't going to cut it in Hard Mode with their crappy bars. Heroes aren't perfect, but they are better. Removing the ability for people to load up H/H and just go to do something is bad. Period.

You can argue the semantics all you want. Guild Wars is a multiplayer game that people can play in single player mode with NPCs. Guild Wars is a single player game with the option to play with others. All that matters in the end is how many people prefer each one. Since both options have large followings, it's best to just keep both options. Advocating a change that would alienate a large portion of a game because you personally believe that heroes are a bad option for the game is hardly objective. Removing the ability to H/H would be a worse choice than keeping the status quo. If you honestly believe that removing H/H would return Guild Wars to some golden era where players happily grouped with others and loved it regardless of the outcome, then I'm sorry, but you're delusional. You know what would happen? People would quit. They're used to the now, and there's no going back.

RedNova88 · Jun 19, 2009, 07:18 AM // 07:18

IMO heroes were both a good and bad thing. They were good in the sense that they cannot leech off of you as a real player could if willing. They cannot scam or ridicule you... Well they could if programmed that way, but that's not the point. They make it easier for people to hop in and go do something. I get the feeling they were basically added in as a preemptive strike against the community dying out or becoming too anti-social. Henchmen were already there for that I suppose, but a whole party of henchmen is failtastic in every sense of the made up word. That and they just add more depth to the game. Who gives a crap about henchmen despite their personalities and background stories? Heroes have that AND they are a major part of each campaign. They were a good thing IMO.

Heroes bad? Perhaps to some. Remember though, that without them it would be PuG, guild, or henchmen. Living in a world without heroes? No thank you. I don't PuG anymore, and never will so long as I have a couple friends online and heroes. Most PuGs no matter how well thought out usually dissolve into some rambo type wiping the group repeatedly. Not that it's impossible to get good PuGs. Often enough it's just not worth the effort finding a good PuG. Guildies/Friends/Heroes or it's adios. Heroes give people the option to wing it with a half decent party (literally) and let us drop in and take the helm on the battlefield. It's nigh impossible these days to make your team listen to you for five seconds. Nothing like doing nightfall missions on HM only to see half your group get bombed instantly and rage because they apparently turned into a Lemming and rushed into a boss mob. Heroes are a godsend. I can vanquish and do HM missions with a couple of friends and fill the rest with heroes. Give them a good build and go to town.

That's all I care to say.

EDIT: Actually come to think of it I don't really see anything bad with heroes other than the birth of lolhero battles and the fact that they can't comprehend some builds.

Yelling @ Cats · Jun 19, 2009, 07:34 AM // 07:34

Titles encouraged people to play with hench more than heroes did.

"Hold on while I scrap this part of the map"
"Can we go this way, I know it's the long way, but I need it on my map?"
"I really really need to cap this skill from the boss on the other side of the map"

It also encouraged farming even more, to get sweet tooth and drunkard. So yeah, the game was in a downward spiral way before heroes came onto the scene, from a combination of titles, and PuGs being absolutely terrible. Mending Wammos all over the place, people who had no idea what they were doing, etc etc.

DreamWind · Jun 19, 2009, 09:51 AM // 09:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

This option is good.

Proof?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gli

Heroes are good because they make the game more enjoyable for people who prefer to play without strangers in their party, without taking away anything from people who want to play with strangers in their party, other than the companionship of people who don't want to play with them in the first place.

Now, I'd like to see your 20 reasons why they are bad.

Although I could give you 20, I don't need to. Using your logic I only need to give you 2. So here it goes..

BUT before we get to those 2 reasons, I will state that your supposedly good reason already has a flaw in it. The flaw assumes that I am only talking about pugs amd I'm only talking about PvE (more on that when I respond to the next guy). This has nothing to do with strangers. It has everything to do with Guild Wars becoming a single player game. I really don't care who people are playing with. The point is it DID take away from people who want to play with others, because now others will likely not play with them when they may have before. I haven't even touched the problems caused in PvP yet...

Now for those 2 reasons.

PvE- Contributed to GW being a solo non unique game. Contributed to teamwork, strategy, and tactics being nonexistant...essentially the death of the team. Contributed to a solo mentality, where even many guilds may not play with each other due to heroes (my friend who is in one of the biggest PvE guilds in the game even made this comment to me)...essentially the death of the Guild Wars (we might as well call the game AI Wars). Contributed to the death of pugs. I suppose Bryant Again will post and say I have no evidence on some of these, so I posted a lot of reasons to counteract.

PvP- Killed HA almost singlehandedly. Also severely decreased GvG population singlehandedly (to a lesser extent). Any AI in PvP is essentially a joke. I suppose I could also say HB is possibly the worst thing in the entire game, but that would be a knock on the format more than heroes themselves.

Quote:

Originally Posted by angelsarc

It's amazing how you guys can argue that PUGs are necessary for the survival of Guild Wars and that heroes have killed the game. Even from an objective standpoint that's ludicrous.

I am not saying heroes killed the game. I am saying heroes contributed to the decline of the game. Big difference.

And although I do feel that pugs are a good part of any online game, I am also not limiting this problem to pugs. In fact while pugs were affected by heroes, that is probably one of the problems that is least important. Heroes affected EVERY SINGLE part of the game from PvE to PvP. It was a sweeping action that changed everything from the game itself to the players who played it. I am tired of all these posts going on and on about how pugs and people were bad anyways. Yes that is a problem (that was not directly helped by heroes ironically), but that isn't the major problems I am talking about.

Quote:

Originally Posted by angelsarc

How many people do you think would stop playing if they became unable to use heroes to do things in hard mode? Henchmen just aren't going to cut it in Hard Mode with their crappy bars.

Now we touch on another problem with heroes...they are completely inbalanced when compared to the AI you are fighting against in PvE. As far as I'm concerned, nobody should be able to beat HARD mode without a team in a game where team work and guilds are key. We are playing a game called Guild Wars where we can use AI to beat nearly anything in the game without a team or a guild. It is ridiculous IMO. Heroes contributed to the game becoming easy...and for anybody competent the game is unbelievably easy nowadays even in HARD mode (the mode that is supposed to be hard).

The worst part is that whatever challenge is left in Guild Wars no longer comes from areas where it matters. In Prophecies, many areas (such as THK) were hard because you needed a team coordinated enough to do them. Team coordination and strategy was critical and were true skill. Nowadays all we have to do is roll some heroes and roll any area in the game (outside of some elite areas but nobody does those anyways because FoW and UW have better rewards and are also stupidly easy now thanks in part to heroes). Skill in Guild Wars PvE no longer comes from team related criteria...it comes from being able to slap the best equipment and inbalanced bars on your heroes (sprinkle in some PvE skills and consumables if you wish) and mashing your head against your keyboard. Thats how I see it. There is no longer a barometer letting players know how badly they suck, which is one of the biggest problems with the game and is caused in large part by the existence of heroes. I could probably argue that the PvE game takes no skill thanks largely in part to heroes, but I won't because being able to smash your head is an art form, and there are noobs who will post saying the game is still hard. /endrant

Quote:

Originally Posted by angelsarc

People will play with others if they want to do so. Making them unable to do anything without playing with others would be a horrible decision.

Nobody has ever been forced to play with others except in some PvP.

Quote:

Originally Posted by angelsarc

If you honestly believe that removing H/H would return Guild Wars to some golden era where players happily grouped with others and loved it regardless of the outcome, then I'm sorry, but you're delusional. You know what would happen? People would quit. They're used to the now, and there's no going back.

I know H/H won't be removed. People love them and they serve as a perfect patch to cover up all the problems ANet will never fix. I know the game will never go back to the so called "golden era" where everything was supposedly milk and honey. That isn't the point though. The question this thread asked was if heroes negatively affected the game, and my answer is yes 90% of the time.

Elephantaliste · Jun 19, 2009, 10:09 AM // 10:09

Heroes did not kill GW.
That is just called power creep.
No one force you to use them.

Bryant Again · Jun 19, 2009, 10:25 AM // 10:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

To me you are not asking HOW it happened....you are asking IF it happened. IF it happened we know HOW it happened.

Hopefully you didn't miss my edit in regards to this, but I'll elaborate as well, just in-case. And to which I say:

Er, what?

We have a start and a finish. At the start things were populated. Now far less so. I'm definitely asking *how* it happened. This entails how much each "problem" contributed to the whole.

And to that we dunno.

Gli · Jun 19, 2009, 11:46 AM // 11:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

It has everything to do with Guild Wars becoming a single player game.

Which isn't true.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

I really don't care who people are playing with. The point is it DID take away from people who want to play with others, because now others will likely not play with them when they may have before.

But now that they have an other option they don't. Doesn't that tell you that it's a good option, if so many people find the game more enjoyable playing that way?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

PvE- Contributed to GW being a solo non unique game. Contributed to teamwork, strategy, and tactics being nonexistant...essentially the death of the team.

Death of the team? Hardly. People who want to team up will team up and actually do team up. You can stamp your feet and deny it, but it's true. If it's become less prevalent, it's because the people who don't want to do it, don't have to do it and actually don't do it. Sounds like a perfect setup to me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Contributed to a solo mentality, where even many guilds may not play with each other due to heroes (my friend who is in one of the biggest PvE guilds in the game even made this comment to me)

So your friend's experience leads you to believe this is the case in many guilds? Well, my experience tells me differently. Anecdotal evidence doesn't prove anything.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Contributed to the death of pugs.

Of course heroes contributed. They made it easier for players to avoid them, which obviously they want to, because they do. Heroes aren't the reason, they're a catalyst.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

PvP- Killed HA almost singlehandedly. Also severely decreased GvG population singlehandedly (to a lesser extent). Any AI in PvP is essentially a joke. I suppose I could also say HB is possibly the worst thing in the entire game, but that would be a knock on the format more than heroes themselves.

There are several more compelling reasons to explain the decline of PvP. Players leaving the game and not being replaced by fresh blood because of the ever-increasing difficulty threshold to get into PvP because of new professions and a very big pool of skills. Nightfall-era PvP doesn't compare to Prophecies-era at all; the exact effect of heroes can't be measured against all other developments/changes, except through useless anecdotal evidence and conjecture.